New Government Report spells disaster for on-shore Wind Energy

windnoiseinfo

Correct -

electricity is a function of wind speed
noise generated is a function of wind speed

more wind = more noise & more electricity

Dermot McDonnell

An Bord Pleanála have further postponed a decision on the massive Oweninny, and Cluddaun, wind farm applications. The first decision date, announced following the oral hearings, was end of Sept, then end of Dec, then end of Jan and now 27th February.

Perhaps they are suffering from indigestion?

The judgement of Peart J. in the High Court, a few weeks ago, will likely have an impact. The Judge ruled that the grant of planning permission by An Bord Pleanála for the relatively tiny Framore Wind Farm was flawed:

"..I have already concluded that in reality the wind farm and its connection in due course to the national grid is one project, neither being independent of the other as was the case on R (Littlewood) v. Bassetlaw District Council [supra] for example. The Board’s submissions are very much predicated on the contrary argument, and on the fact as submitted also by Framore that at this point in time there have been no proposals formulated by ESB Networks for the design and route of the connection to the national grid. That argument does not, it seems to me, justify treating phase 1 as a stand-alone project when in truth it is not. Rather, it points to a prematurity in the seeking of permission for the construction of the wind farm ahead of the detailed proposals for its connection to the national grid from ESB Networks..." Peart, J. [2014] IEHC 632

I am not an expert but I believe the implications of the judgement are that planning permissions granted for wind turbines where there is neither existing, or permissioned, grid capacity amount to a nullity. Cluddaun is entirely dependent on Eirgrids GridWest project, as yet unpermissioned, and approximately 200MW of the 371MW total capacity of Oweninny is similarly constrained. Existing grid at Bellacorick has capacity for 171MW.

windnoiseinfo

Basically you will see no movement for about a year

if an EIS has to consider the whole project and the connection is not available then the whole project cannot be considered

Until GridWest is unlocked then its stuck - when GridWest submits its planning it will have to include in its assessment as per the directive

direct and indirect effects of a project on the following factors:
(a) human beings, fauna and flora;
(b) soil, water, air, climate and the landscape;
(c) material assets and the cultural heritage;
(d) the interaction between the factors referred to in points (a), (b) and (c)

an indirect effect will be a wind farm connected to it - so it will have to assess every wind farm which is already built or is going to be built and connected to the grid as well as the pylons/cables etc itself

talk about being tied up in knots !!

Dermot McDonnell

windnoiseinfo wrote: »

Basically you will see no movement for about a year ...
talk about being tied up in knots !!

The ESB and BnM were very careful to structure their planning application for Oweninny in three phases. Phases 1 & 2 can be granted permission on the basis of existing grid capacity at Bellacorick.

An Bord Pleanála must decide the planning applications based on current law in a timely manner. The Framore judgement has changed the law and it will most likely kill off Cluddaun and Phase 3 of Oweninny, but not Phases 1 & 2.

Expect a decision soon.

I have not mentioned the mean wind speed evidence given by the chief scientist for the ESB at the oral hearings, suffice it to say at this point, that his evidence conflicts sharply with the energy production figures supplied in the planning application. I shall post a transcript of the evidence of the chief scientist when it is released by ABP.

fclauson

Dermot McDonnell wrote: »

T I shall post a transcript of the evidence of the chief scientist when it is released by ABP.

Any idea when ?

oppenheimer1

Dermot McDonnell wrote: »

You might imagine that the prospect of losing €30m per year for 33 years would be bad news for the ESB and BnM, but the new wind atlas is a godsend for them.

They claim a capacity factor of 0.33 for Oweninny and it's pretty clear if you look at the numbers above, that the existing wind atlas forecasts much greater production and a vastly more profitable wind farm business. Their 0.33 figure appears 4 times in 3 different documents in their planning application. I guess it comes as no surprise to you that the new wind atlas rather precisely predicts a capacity factor of around 0.33 for the smallest turbine, V90, at the lowest hub height, 90m a.g. The calculation above for the new wind atlas gives 0.348 at 100m a.g.

I am fairly sure that the new, unpublished, SEAI wind atlas will find its way to An Bord Pleanála, who may then rely on it as "independent" verification of the Oweninny production figures. A decision is due soon.

In granting a planning permission, the Bord verifies the scientific data in the Environmental Impact Statement, including the production figures. In doing so, the Bord places a value on Oweninny Power Ltd., the ESB/BnM joint vehicle. That value will, of course, be far less than the existing wind atlas, and other data, would imply.

My money is on the sale of OPL, or even BnM, following any grant of planning permission for Oweninny. The lucky new owners will discover a vastly richer cash flow when Oweninny wind farm comes on-line. Who knows, we might even see a management buyout of these state assets.

If it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, waddles like a duck, then maybe they will float it, like a duck, and become very rich indeed

Thats all a bit conspiracy theory - grounded entirely in conjecture and not fact.

Dermot McDonnell

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

Thats all a bit conspiracy theory - grounded entirely in conjecture and not fact.

Really?

The summary wind data for Oweninny, measured over 10 years, and published by BnM is a fact.
The UK DTI study of 8 wind farms north of the border over 7 years is a fact.
The evidence given to the Oral Hearings by the Chief Scientist for the ESB is a fact.
The Irish Wind Energy Study of Oweninny is a fact.
The new wind altas, which predicts half the energy yield at Oweninny compared to the old Wind Atlas, is a fact.

All of these facts clearly indicate that the ESB and Bord na Móna are lying to the public about their expected energy yield at Oweninny in the amount of several thousand millions euro. I dont need to speculate, the evidence very very clear. The question is what is An Bord Pleanála going to do about it. The State is unlikely to take on the State.

Now, perhaps you would you care to point out the conjecture, please?

oppenheimer1

Dermot McDonnell wrote: »

Really?

The summary wind data for Oweninny, measured over 10 years, and published by BnM is a fact.
The UK DTI study of 8 wind farms north of the border over 7 years is a fact.
The evidence given to the Oral Hearings by the Chief Scientist for the ESB is a fact.
The Irish Wind Energy Study of Oweninny is a fact.
The new wind altas, which predicts half the energy yield at Oweninny compared to the old Wind Atlas, is a fact.

All of these facts clearly indicate that the ESB and Bord na Móna are lying to the public about their expected energy yield at Oweninny in the amount of several thousand millions euro. I dont need to speculate, the evidence very very clear. The question is what is An Bord Pleanála going to do about it. The State is unlikely to take on the State.

Now, perhaps you would you care to point out the conjecture, please?

The conjecture and conspiracy as you see it is straight forward. You're saying that the ESB, BnM and the SEAI are in cahoots together to deliberately downplay the national wind resource in order to build a larger wind farm that they will then sell at an undervalued price in a management buyout. You have no evidence for any of this, your only "fact" is that the new map has lower wind speeds than the old. This is to be expected given the changing meteorological conditions, and likely higher resolution of the new map.

I get that you're against the new turbine project, but please if you're going to object, do so on genuine grounds like loss of visual amenity, not a spurious pseudo scientific, borderline libelous one.

Paul Thomas Rowland

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

...I get that you're against the new turbine project, but please if you're going to object, do so on genuine grounds like loss of visual amenity, not a spurious pseudo scientific, borderline libelous one.

Lol, you could not be further from the truth. Dermot Mcdonnell is from Moygownagh, right next Cluddaun, and he is perhaps the best known supporter of developing the wind resource in Mayo having campaigned in favour of doing that in the 2011 election. He did not get much support. We find ourselves unlikely allies as my family and I, as well as most people in our community, are completely opposed to the destruction of our environment by wind turbines and we support Peter Sweetman in his efforts to protect it.

I think it fair to say that many of us were suspicious of Mr Mcdonnells motives until he publicly destroyed the ESB and Bord na Móna energy production claims and their scientific team at the oral hearings, minced meat. Their senior counsel nearly had a heart attack. Following that session, Coillte refused to disclose their wind speed measurements, information would have created even greater difficulties for the ESB and Bord na Móna.

Mr Mcdonnell is no lightweight. He has a degree in mathematical physics and a 20 year career in London investment banking. He is fully qualified to put a value on these projects and ask why the state valuation is so much lower than the independent scientific evidence suggests. Most people here agree with him when he says we should have a full accounting of our natural resources to avoid economic disasters like Shell - that refinery is 10 miles away. It is widely believe here that corruption on the part of the state led to that disaster, the Department responsible was Energy Communitcaion and Resources, the very people with political responsibility for ESB, Bord na Móna and SEAI today.

The independent scientific reports predate the planning application and predict excellent production around here. Along come ESB and Bord na Móna with miserable production estimates in a planning application where no such estimates are required. They run into difficulties at the oral hearing and, lol and behold, the new wind atlas is secretly released by the SEAI sometime last summer after the hearings. SEAI did not publish it but made it available to those who might ask for it. It, and it alone, provides backing for the ESB and Bord na Móna production figures. What a surprise then that of the many state institutions with wind data, only ESB and Bord na Móna were invited to contribute to the new atlas. What a surprise also that the Oweninny Project Manager is thanked for his confidential "mast observations".

Institutionalised crime imo. I did suggest at the start of this thread that Mr Mcdonnell report the matter to the Gardaí.

fclauson

Paul Thomas Rowland wrote: »

... Following that session, Coillte refused to disclose their wind speed measurements, information would have created even greater difficulties for the ESB and Bord na Móna.

Submit an AIE request - they are a public authority and this cannot be withheld as it information which "relates to the environment"

Paul Thomas Rowland

fclauson wrote: »

Submit an AIE request - they are a public authority and this cannot be withheld as it information which "relates to the environment"

Great idea. Thank you very much.

oppenheimer1

Paul Thomas Rowland wrote: »

The independent scientific reports predate the planning application and predict excellent production around here. Along come ESB and Bord na Móna with miserable production estimates in a planning application where no such estimates are required. They run into difficulties at the oral hearing and, lol and behold, the new wind atlas is secretly released by the SEAI sometime last summer after the hearings. SEAI did not publish it but made it available to those who might ask for it. It, and it alone, provides backing for the ESB and Bord na Móna production figures. What a surprise then that of the many state institutions with wind data, only ESB and Bord na Móna were invited to contribute to the new atlas. What a surprise also that the Oweninny Project Manager is thanked for his confidential "mast observations".

Institutionalised crime imo. I did suggest at the start of this thread that Mr Mcdonnell report the matter to the Gardaí.

It is hardly surprising that the atlas and BnM figures are in agreement since they both are derived from the same source. So perhaps yes, you cannot rely on the atlas for compete independent verification of the project estimates. However, they are not the only source for the maps and if logs were doctored to give a required result the figures would be obvious. In fact the oweninny figures follow the general trend of falling wind speeds, if they remained static, I would be along questioning it.

Values for wind for northern Ireland are also presented in this thread, but they are out of date, by 10 years! I just don't buy the argument that a national body like the seai would knowingly produce a map that understated the national wind resource so that others profit from it (in a management buy out). No evidence has been supplied to support this

Dermot McDonnell

fclauson wrote: »

Submit an AIE request - they are a public authority and this cannot be withheld as it information which "relates to the environment"

@fclauson, Greatly appreciated. I have written to Coillte as you suggested. I shall also ask ESB, BnM and Met Eireann for the wind data for the relevant areas. I will revert when they respond.

Dermot McDonnell

@oppenheimer1, I greatly appreciate your contribution here, if I cannot convince a skeptic that something is amiss I am likely wasting my time. I shall attempt to address the issues you raise in turn.

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

It is hardly surprising that the atlas and BnM figures are in agreement since they both are derived from the same source.

No, the Minister tells us the ESB and Bord na Móna mast data "was used by the contractor in the validation of the remodelled wind atlas datasets." That is to say, the remodelled data sets were compiled independently by the contractor and afterwards they met with ESB/BnM to see how the numbers looked. As the contractor was the UK Met Office, the new atlas appears to provide very powerful verification of the ESB/BnM production figures as it very precisely predicts that number for the smallest turbine geometry at the lowest hub height proposed, 90m a.g (above ground).

The fall in the mean power density at Oweninny in the New Wind Atlas, versus the Old, is ~50% at 100m above ground. From the maps, it would appear that there is a similar sharp fall in wind power across the Republic.

If the fall is 50% at 100m, what do you think the effect is at ground level. Don't you think we might have noticed? For example, a wind surfer would need a much larger sail, for the same body mass. Our legendary wind resource is now mediocre, forgive me if I missed that news story.

The large fall in the mean power density, in the absence of any significant change in mean air temperature/pressure, indicates a big drop in the mean kinetic energy of the atmospheric fluid over Ireland from 2000-2009. Thus the new wind atlas is the clearest evidence to date for Global Cooling.

The new wind atlas conflicts with the existing scientific data in exactly the same way the ESB/BnM production data does. The mean wind speeds, measured by BnM 50 a.g. at Oweninny over 2002 - 2010, for the 3 masts are 7.6m/s, 7.7m/s and 7.8m/s. The new atlas predicts 7.7m/s at 100m a.g. Real wind speed measurements at Oweninny show no fall at all in mean power density compared to earlier studies.

.... the oweninny figures follow the general trend of falling wind speeds..

What general trend of falling wind speeds? You are already fully invested in what SEAI have said:

"The updated 2013 atlas derives its data mostly from the decade commencing 2000, whereas the previous version of the atlas derived mostly from the decade commencing 1990. It is a recognised meteorological phenomenon that wind speeds were generally lower in the more recent decade and thus it is to be expected that specific figures would be lower in the updated atlas than the equivalent in the previous version."

Recognised by whom? Is there any scientific evidence, other than the new wind atlas, that shows the mean power density of the wind has changed significantly in the past 25 or indeed 50 years?

Values for wind for northern Ireland are also presented in this thread, but they are out of date, by 10 years!

5 of the 7 years considered are in the 2000s, the period considered by the new wind atlas. I can only use the scientific studies that are available, I don't make them up.

I just don't buy the argument that a national body like the seai would knowingly produce a map that understated the national wind resource so that others profit from it (in a management buy out). No evidence has been supplied to support this

The Minister tells us:

"The wind atlas was primarily intended as an information tool for Local Authorities in identifying areas suitable for renewable energy development within County Development Plans. Local Authorities have subsequently utilised the SEAI wind atlas as a basis for developing county wind energy strategies."

Local authorities are also including Community Benefit Contributions in their County Development Plans. Those contributions should be related to the value and profitability of developing a natural resource. Under the new wind atlas scenario, wind farms are less productive and vastly less profitable than they were in the 90s and as a consequence all wind farms will, in fairness to these "struggling" businesses, pay little or nothing to the small rural communities that host these projects.

Dept of CENR has no interest in inflicting serious community benefit contributions on it's own business interests, that would mean less bolly for them and their pals. The new wind atlas takes care of that problem across the county at a stroke.

..

but please if you're going to object, do so on genuine grounds like loss of visual amenity, not a spurious pseudo scientific, borderline libelous one.

Forgive me for suggesting that great institutions of state may be rotten to the core, that's not something that has ever happened in Ireland before. Sadly, it is difficult for a nerd like me to ignore the data that strongly suggests they are lying their heads off, utterly corrupt, that we live in the Kenny Kleptocracy and not in a normal western democracy. I cannot escape the numbers. Statistics don't lie, people do.

The Oweninny Planning Application was submitted July 4th, 2013. I made no posts anywhere and took my case to An Bord Pleanála and the oral hearings. When I discovered that SEAI has secretly placed the new wind atlas in the public domain, I decided that this represented an unacceptable level of risk that ABP would grant permission based on it, in doing so certify the production figures, and open up the possibility of disposal of this extremely valuable asset without any democratic control possibly leading to another Shell on my doorstep. Oweninny is wrapped up and ready to go, the special purpose vehicle and legals are all in place. All they need is certification of their numbers to execute a truly epic fraud. The equivalent of a Northern Bank raid each year for 30+ years, index linked. Way too much risk for a conservative nerdy old ex-banker like me.

So, I'll take my chances in the libel courts. You will note however, that in the four months existence of this thread, none of the usual paid naysayers have shown up and no scientific evidence has been presented to suggest that what I say is inaccurate or false.

Fabo

The capacity factor for 2014 was 28.7% so it doesnt matter how big of a wind turbine you have - when there are low wind speeds you will end up with a low CF.

So its not possible to certify the production figures of a wind farm. Get a bad year like last year or 2010 which was much worse and your golden egg turns into a bronze one.

I locked horns with a couple of BnM wind engineers, I dont think these windfarms will be sold on, the idea for these guys is to build big careers out of it.

If you want to object to a windfarm, then the best reason is the energy bubble (aswell as the lack of legal compliance) :

http://irishenergyblog.blogspot.ie/2015/01/energy-bub.html

Dermot McDonnell

Fabo wrote: »

...So its not possible to certify the production figures of a wind farm. Get a bad year like last year or 2010 which was much worse and your golden egg turns into a bronze one...

Thank you for this. It is perfectly possible to predict accurately the yield of a wind farm from data measurements, despite the stochastic nature of the resource. Let me illustrate with a graphic from the Met Eireann Annual Report 2004. Belmullet is the closest synoptic station to Oweninny.


The first and final annual mean wind speed vary by less than 2%.
If you predict the total yield, or capacity factor, over the entire period on the basis of the first two years measurements, you will be spot on.
There is no evidence for huge variations in power density.


The more data you have the more accurate your predictions. BnM are on record as having an excellent data for Oweninny - “the longest line of clean wind data of any company in the British Isles going back to 1990.”

oppenheimer1

Dermot McDonnell wrote: »

Thank you for this. It is perfectly possible to predict accurately the yield of a wind farm from data measurements, despite the stochastic nature of the resource. Let me illustrate with a graphic from the Met Eireann Annual Report 2004. Belmullet is the closest synoptic station to Oweninny.


The first and final annual mean wind speed vary by less than 2%.
If you predict the total yield, or capacity factor, over the entire period on the basis of the first two years measurements, you will be spot on.
There is no evidence for huge variations in power density.


The more data you have the more accurate your predictions. BnM are on record as having an excellent data for Oweninny - “the longest line of clean wind data of any company in the British Isles going back to 1990.”

Again Dermot, the chart you've provided does nothing to back up your argument really, since it doesn't include the 2000-2010 dataset.

Because I've got very little better to be at, from the most current met eireann dataset for Belmullet (obtainable from the website), a very basic analysis shows fall in the average windspeed in the period 2000-2010 compared to 1990-2000, somewhere between 15 and 20%. It is not inconceivable that a more pronounced effect is observed at a greater height. I'm sorry but your conspiracy doesn't stack up I'm afraid.

Dermot McDonnell

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

Again Dermot, the chart you've provided does nothing to back up your argument really, since it doesn't include the 2000-2010 dataset.

Here is the Met Eireann graphic for Dublin Airport 1944 - 2010. Do you see any sign of any large variations over that period? Any sign of half of the wind power disappearing in the 2000's?

Because I've got very little better to be at, from the most current met eireann dataset for Belmullet (obtainable from the website), a very basic analysis shows fall in the average windspeed in the period 2000-2010 compared to 1990-2000, somewhere between 15 and 20%.

Would you be so kind as to publish your figures, please?

It is not inconceivable that a more pronounced effect is observed at a greater height.....

It is inconceivable actually, as friction effects are more pronounced closer to ground. The topology of an area does not change significantly in a human lifetime, the friction effect locally is more or less a constant. The disappearance of 50% of the power density at 100m a.g. is nothing to do with friction, it is a top down effect. A fall of 50% at 100m a.g., predicts a greater fall at 10m a.g. The Met Eireann figures are measured at 10m a.g.

I look forward to your calculations.

Paul Thomas Rowland

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

..I'm sorry but your conspiracy doesn't stack up I'm afraid.

Excuse me, but you ignore the published BnM wind data for the period 2002 - 2010 at Oweninny entirely. Do you accept that their published wind speeds conflict sharply with their production figures and the new wind atlas speeds for the site?

I see no evidence at Dublin Airport or Belmullet for decade long periods of low wind power. From the Dublin Airport graphics you can see that the period 2000 - 2009 is the windiest decade over the 66 years. So the new wind atlas is completely wrong about that location also. Can you accept that from the independent scientific Met Eireann data?

If you have any scientific evidence to support the disappearance of the wind resource anywhere in Ireland but at Oweninny in particular, please publish the data. So far, all of the evidence points in the opposite direction - that the wind resource is just as good today as it was in the 1990s or any other decade for which we have measurements.

Is there any independent scientific evidence, anything at all, that supports the new wind atlas view of future electricity production from wind across Ireland? That is my key issue.

oppenheimer1

Dermot McDonnell wrote: »

Here is the Met Eireann graphic for Dublin Airport 1944 - 2010. Do you see any sign of any large variations over that period? Any sign of half of the wind power disappearing in the 2000's?

Would you be so kind as to publish your figures, please?

No. I do not have a license to publish Met Eireann data. It is available to registered users to download from the website.

Dermot McDonnell wrote: »

It is inconceivable actually, as friction effects are more pronounced closer to ground. The topology of an area does not change significantly in a human lifetime, the friction effect locally is more or less a constant. The disappearance of 50% of the power density at 100m a.g. is nothing to do with friction, it is a top down effect. A fall of 50% at 100m a.g., predicts a greater fall at 10m a.g. The Met Eireann figures are measured at 10m a.g.

I look forward to your calculations.

Wind interaction with the ground is a complicated matter and unfortunately I do not have a qualification in fluid dynamics. Given the complexity of the process and the number of factors involved it is almost certainly a non linear process. If the process is non linear (in a similar manner to wind resistance) then you would see a damping effect at ground level - that is higher wind speeds would experience proportionally more reduction than a lower one thus pushing the the two averages closer together at ground level.

I don't think its fair to include values from Dublin airport. That met station is at a low level and sits in a sheltered position behind the Dublin mountains. Ground level observations for wind speed would not be much representative at levels 50-100m AGL without significant processing

fclauson

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

No. I do not have a license to publish Met Eireann data. It is available to registered users to download from the website.



Wind interaction with the ground is a complicated matter and unfortunately I do not have a qualification in fluid dynamics. Given the complexity of the process and the number of factors involved it is almost certainly a non linear process. If the process is non linear (in a similar manner to wind resistance) then you would see a damping effect at ground level - that is higher wind speeds would experience proportionally more reduction than a lower one thus pushing the the two averages closer together at ground level.

I don't think its fair to include values from Dublin airport. That met station is at a low level and sits in a sheltered position behind the Dublin mountains. Ground level observations for wind speed would not be much representative at levels 50-100m AGL without significant processing

There is a generally agreed formulae for wind shear (the slowing of wind as it approaches the ground)

The wind mast at Dublin is 10M above ground - which is the "standard" for measuring wind speed. All noise calcs for wind farms are done from a standardised 10M wind speed

there is some good info here http://belfortinstrument.com/height-wind-measurements-ground/

Attached is the Valentia 30 year plot very little change for 20 of those years

Paul Thomas Rowland

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

No. I do not have a license to publish Met Eireann data. It is available to registered users to download from the website.

You refuse to publish your mean wind speed calculations for Belmullet 2000-2009 because you say you need a license from the State? HaHa. So we will see no evidence for your claim that you have done any calculations, let alone done them right, you are just making assertions without any science to support your claims. Met Eireannn wind data is information relating to the state of the environment and is available from them on request, no license required.

Wind interaction with the ground is a complicated matter and unfortunately I do not have a qualification in fluid dynamics. Given the complexity of the process and the number of factors involved it is almost certainly a non linear process. If the process is non linear (in a similar manner to wind resistance) then you would see a damping effect at ground level - that is higher wind speeds would experience proportionally more reduction than a lower one thus pushing the the two averages closer together at ground level.

Rubbish. Wind Energy does not come out of the ground, wind loses energy to the ground via friction. Friction loses are far higher at 10m above ground than they are at 100m where friction is a very very weak effect. If mean power levels at 10m rise in any location over a 10 year period, then it is impossible that mean wind power at 100m in the same location will have fallen over the same period. Only an idiot would suggest otherwise.

I don't think its fair to include values from Dublin airport. That met station is at a low level and sits in a sheltered position behind the Dublin mountains.

BooHoo, it was dreadfully unfair of the OP to post Met Eireann wind figures for Dublin Airport. Even more unfair that Met Eireann located the Dublin Airport Met Eireann mast in a spot that does not meet with your full approval. Dreadfully unfair that the wind data measurements for Dublin Airport show that your opinion of the wind resource, like the new wind altas, is completely wrong. Ignoring data measurements that contradict your world view on spurious grounds is called investigator bias. All Met Eireann meteorological masts are 10m tall, there is nothing special about the Dublin Airport mast.

I bet you do not like the Met Eireann wind measurements for Valencia much either, they show no drop in wind resource in the period 2000-2009 in County Kerry.

The Dublin Airport, Belmullet and Valencia wind measurement are long nails in the coffin of the new SEAI wind atlas but Dublin Airport is a long way from here and Valencia is even further. Any graphics available for the other Met Eireann wind masts in Mayo and Sligo? They may clinch the argument.

fclauson

Bellmullet is number 3
Newport is number 20

fclauson

oppenheimer1 wrote: »

No. I do not have a license to publish Met Eireann data. It is available to registered users to download from the website.

Data is free from here - http://www.met.ie/climate-request/

Paul Thomas Rowland

fclauson wrote: »

Bellmullet is number 3
Newport is number 20
..

Thank you for Newport. No evidence there of our wind resource disappearing but it is a very limited number of years and the State will argue that the resource at Newport disappeared in 2000-2005. Can you do a graphic of Belmullet to the present day, please? Knock Airport, Claremorris and the Sligo Met stations would be great to have also. With your permission I am going to print your graphics and include them in our local newsletter?

fclauson

Ballymullet


Claremorris

LiamMayo

Thank you for the wind data. Very very interesting n reliable measurements from the met office that paints a clear picture of wind power in this country for the past 50 or 60 years. Its gotta be clear to most readers that esb n bord na mona n the government are telling us porky pies about owenniny n cluddaun. their new wind atlas is evidence manufactured post facto by seai, esb n bord na mona in support of a massive energy fraud worth billions of euros over the next 30 yrs. How much of this cash is going to the TDs n senators n councilors n officials who have bent over backwards to support these huge wind farms. these projects never once got mentioned on rte when they were showing wind energy specials a year ago. expect another shell in north mayo once they try to break ground on this one. some people never learn. they got way way too greedy this time n have been found out before the deal is done. good work people. Liam Belmullet.

fclauson

My charts hide some of the truth because Mr Average is a nasty thing - I am doing some further statistical analysis which is showing less of a variation if you remove out the real anomalies like the very big storms which last 24hrs and can have very high wind speeds which can skew results. This is reasonable because the turbines will be shut down for safety reason.

Dermot McDonnell

fclauson wrote: »

My charts hide some of the truth because Mr Average is a nasty thing - I am doing some further statistical analysis which is showing less of a variation if you remove out the real anomalies like the very big storms which last 24hrs and can have very high wind speeds which can skew results..

I disagree. In deriving mean wind speeds, all valid data should be included. The derived mean wind speed is used by scientists to calculate projected energy yield or capacity factor. It is capacity factor that ESB and Bord na Móna have used in their planning application and there is a standard methodology for figuring that out.

You could take the data series for any Met Eireann mast and model it against all of the wind turbines considered for Oweninny and you would get the expected yield for that location for each turbine type at 10m above ground, for what its worth.

What is becoming increasing clear in this thread is that there is no evidence, from any Met Eireann weather stations, for a fall in mean wind power density anywhere in this country over the period 2000-2009. The claim by SEAI that "It is a recognised meteorological phenomenon that wind speeds were generally lower in the more recent decade.." is proving false and provides an excellent scientific basis for a legal challenge should An Bord Pleanala rely on the new SEAI wind atlas to certify the ESB and Bord na Móna production figures for Oweninny.

I greatly appreciate all contributions. We are overdue a decision from ABP in respect of Oweninny and Cluddaun. Hopefully it will issue on Friday of next week as planned.

oppenheimer1

Dermot McDonnell wrote: »

I disagree. In deriving mean wind speeds, all valid data should be included. The derived mean wind speed is used by scientists to calculate projected energy yield or capacity factor. It is capacity factor that ESB and Bord na Móna have used in their planning application and there is a standard methodology for figuring that out.

You could take the data series for any Met Eireann mast and model it against all of the wind turbines considered for Oweninny and you would get the expected yield for that location for each turbine type at 10m above ground, for what its worth.

What is becoming increasing clear in this thread is that there is no evidence, from any Met Eireann weather stations, for a fall in mean wind power density anywhere in this country over the period 2000-2009. The claim by SEAI that "It is a recognised meteorological phenomenon that wind speeds were generally lower in the more recent decade.." is proving false and provides an excellent scientific basis for a legal challenge should An Bord Pleanala rely on the new SEAI wind atlas to certify the ESB and Bord na Móna production figures for Oweninny.

I greatly appreciate all contributions. We are overdue a decision from ABP in respect of Oweninny and Cluddaun. Hopefully it will issue on Friday of next week as planned.

This is not true. The belmullet synoptic station data shows an average fall in observed wind speed at 10m over the years 2000-2010 vs the previous decade.